---The trouble is that you think you have time------Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe------It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---

From the very limited knowledge I have and from what I have understood so far, I think Two living Arahants are not the same. I might be wrong, but this is how I see it so far

An arahanth means, a person who has gained a full insight into the true nature of things. In simple terms, they do not have a "Chethana Chaithisika" and they do not create new Sankara. However, their human qualities (Characteristics?) can be different. One could be shy and timid while the other could be more outgoing and outspoken etc. I remember in one of the suttas (I cannot remember the name of the sutta or the name of the monk) there was this Arahant monk in Buddha's time and he spoke harsh words often to address the people (i.e. in Sinhala terms - Umba, tho. wareng, palayang etc) and the people did not like his way of speaking and they complained to Buddha about it. The buddha said to them that he doesn't mean at all to offend anyone but he does it because of his habbits in his previous lives. He said that this monk have been born 500 times at a strech in upper class and ruling families. Likewise, thre was another monk who was eating alot and still he was hungry inspite however much he ate and the Buddha said it was due he being born as an elephant over many times in his previous births.

Even though I could not attain Arahantship by reading your post.Thank you for directing my attention to a very important teaching of Buddha. Papanca is a mental state not understood by many. (I understood that only yesterday)Please read Chapter 11 and 12 of link below for full appreciation of this.============="From whatever source papañcasaññasakha beset a man, if, inregard to that, there is nothing to be delighted in, asserted, or clungto, then this itself is the end of the underlying tendencies to attachment,to aversion, to views, to doubts, to conceit, to attachment towardsexistence, and to ignorance. This itself is the end of takingrods and weapons, quarrels, disputes, accusations, slander and falsespeech. Here these evil unskilful states cease without remainder."

Their wisdom is the same; but how they got there and what their specialty is might be different. For example, Moggallana was the chief in supernormal powers and abilities and Sariputta was more of the scholar, the "general of the Dhamma."

The arahants like the Buddha are traceless. Nothing can be said about "them" in the sense that they have ceased to exist in the way we would normally describe things. They are not their physical form nor their character which are the product of causes and conditions. They are not identified with their outward manifestations which is not who they are.

......that form by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him has been abandoned by the Tathagata, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated so that it is no more subject to future arising. The Tathagata, great king, is liberated from reckoning in terms of form; he is deep, immeasurable, hard to fathom like the great ocean.

That feeling by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him … That perception by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him ... Those volitional formations by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him ... That consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata might describe him has been abandoned by the Tathagata, cut off at the root, made like a palm stump, obliterated so that it is no more subject to future arising.

You will not be punished FOR your 'emotions'; you will be punished BY your 'emotions'.

Pay attention, simplify, and (Meditation instruction in a nutshell) "Mind - the Gap." ‘Absit invidia verbo’ - may ill-will be absent from the word. And mindful of that, if I don't respond, this may be why....

Two living arahants are different. Consider, for instance, the Buddha's chief disciples, Sariputta and Maha-Moggallana. There were numerous differences between them, including their personalities and areas of expertise. If I remember right, Sariputta was more gentle while Maha-Moggallana was more severe. Sariputta specialized in getting people through the gateway of stream entry while Maha-Moggallana specialized at training them for the attainment of arahantship. e Of the two, Sariputta had a more comprehensive understanding of the dhamma while Maha-Maggollana was more of an expert in using the psychic abilities attained through jhanas. I hope someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

Obviously the Rupakhanda of two arahants are different. They do look different after all. The other four khandas are different too. There is a different inpingements on the sense bases for each of them, different feeling responses, and ultimately comsciousness of it all, etc.

Being anatta both, or not being, is the sense in which they are the same as each other and as the Buddha.

With metta

Last edited by MidGe on Tue Jul 15, 2014 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.